Anarchism, Socialism, "Libertarianism" - 3 Way Heated Debate: RT

[TGN]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8YsTkJNA3s][143] Anarchism, Socialism & Libertarianism: Alternatives for Peace - YouTube[/ame]

And the winner is...?

 

[midcan5]

There is no winner. First, the debate question starts with a false assumption, republicans and democrats are very different. Does anyone really think a woman would have a right to choose if republicans controlled our politics? They would select judges in the mold of Alito, Thomas and Scalia. Would the ACA be law? Lots of other differences.

So why is there is no winner? Because in the end they are all utopians. Their views are assumptions based on imaginary scenarios and or consequences of behaviors. Consider the libertarian view that less government and regulation would lead to Happyville. No need to even consider that as the Great Depression and the Great Recession give pretty clear examples. Anarchism is the weakest in my opinion as it posits a hippie world that again has examples of failure, the communes for example. Socialism seems at least in this conversation to be a milder form of anarchism which again leads to Disneyland.

Oddly the system we have offers great opportunities as were proven after WWII. If voters paid less attention to agitprop maybe we could again move forward with greater equality and justice. People make up the system and people need to manage the system. Today corporations and money control the idea sphere.

 

[jasonnfree]

There is no winner. First, the debate question starts with a false assumption, republicans and democrats are very different. Does anyone really think a woman would have a right to choose if republicans controlled our politics? They would select judges in the mold of Alito, Thomas and Scalia. Would the ACA be law? Lots of other differences.

So why is there is no winner? Because in the end they are all utopians. Their views are assumptions based on imaginary scenarios and or consequences of behaviors. Consider the libertarian view that less government and regulation would lead to Happyville. No need to even consider that as the Great Depression and the Great Recession give pretty clear examples. Anarchism is the weakest in my opinion as it posits a hippie world that again has examples of failure, the communes for example. Socialism seems at least in this conversation to be a milder form of anarchism which again leads to Disneyland.

Oddly the system we have offers great opportunities as were proven after WWII. If voters paid less attention to agitprop maybe we could again move forward with greater equality and justice. People make up the system and people need to manage the system. Today corporations and money control the idea sphere.

The focus should be on public funded elections. I don't like a few at the top choosing who my candidate will be and I don't think republican voters do either.

 

[TGN]

Anarchism is the weakest in my opinion as it posits a hippie world that again has examples of failure, the communes for example. Socialism seems at least in this conversation to be a milder form of anarchism which again leads to Disneyland.

Oddly the system we have offers great opportunities as were proven after WWII. If voters paid less attention to agitprop maybe we could again move forward with greater equality and justice. People make up the system and people need to manage the system. Today corporations and money control the idea sphere.

Keep in mind that the anarchist in this debate does have practical experience in helping form the Common Ground Collective, a mutual aid group in post-Katrina Louisiana.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=think+tank+anarchism

"In the first three yars of the Common Ground Collective, over twenty-three thousand mostly middle class and white volunteers aided communities that most had no direct connection to apart from the bond of humanity." scott crow - Black Flags and Windmills: Hope, Anarchy and the Common Ground Collective

The CGC brought much needed aid to tens of thousands of Katrina survivors. What do you think they would think of your statement that "(A)narchism...posits a hippie world that again has examples of failure, the communes for example..."

Do you not agree that along with the CGC anarchism has had examples of success as well?

"Around the turn of the century, the Wobblies and other anarchists played the central role in winning workers the 5-day week and 8-hour day." David Graeber - Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology.

As for those great opportunities this society supposedly offered post-WW2, remember part of the reason a viable middle class emerged in the U.S. was because the ruling industrialists wanted to undercut the influence of the unions. They did so by allowing a segment of the population to rise up into the ranks of the middle class. But this was done on the industrialists terms, not the middle classes'. What they giveth, they may try to roll back. So the prosperity you perceive existing in the U.S. isn't innate to the system and is at the discretion of the ruling class due to their continued control of the means of production. Without the influence of the labor movement you wouldn't even enjoy the relative prosperity you have.

 

[midcan5]

... Do you not agree that along with the CGC anarchism has had examples of success as well? ....

I do agree but the people who often help in these situations vary greatly in their political and religious beliefs. My mother would help anyone in need but her motivator was both religion and having grown up in the depression - along with other instigators I'm sure. That was who she was.

The problem with what I consider the more utopian viewpoint is that it sounds good and sometimes even works but it is rarely a complete solution to the complexity of the modern world. Take for instance policies that are supported by government that really do help people. Social Security has surely done some wonderful things for people. Do we abandon it because it has some problems or we do as Reagan did in a rare moment of bipartisanship help it continue to do good? "Human beings will be happier, not when they cure cancer or get to Mars or eliminate racial prejudice or flush Lake Erie, but when they find ways to inhabit primitive communities again. That's my utopia." Kurt Vonnegut has an interesting point but can we get there?

'An Unapologetic Defense of a Vital Institution' - Government is Good - An Unapologetic Defense of a Vital Institution

 

[srlip]

Bill Gates, thru microsoft's aid to computer usage, helped nearly everyone on earth, and his legacy will go on helping. he makes everybody else look like a piker, in that regard. FAR more than he'll ever be able to give away.

 

[TGN]

... Do you not agree that along with the CGC anarchism has had examples of success as well? ....

The problem with what I consider the more utopian viewpoint is that it sounds good and sometimes even works but it is rarely a complete solution to the complexity of the modern world. Take for instance policies that are supported by government that really do help people. Social Security has surely done some wonderful things for people. Do we abandon it because it has some problems or we do as Reagan did in a rare moment of bipartisanship help it continue to do good? "Human beings will be happier, not when they cure cancer or get to Mars or eliminate racial prejudice or flush Lake Erie, but when they find ways to inhabit primitive communities again. That's my utopia." Kurt Vonnegut has an interesting point but can we get there?

'An Unapologetic Defense of a Vital Institution' - Government is Good - An Unapologetic Defense of a Vital Institution

Chomsky suggested that the burden of proof is on centralization. That it must justify itself. I think social security, FAA, international flight treaties, universal healthcare are examples of what Chomsky is referring to. Libertarian Socialism or anarchism is organized regionally, nationally and internationally along the principles of federalism, wherein autonomous units freely unite for common purposes. So, thinking practically, couldn't things like social security, universal healthcare, air traffic treaties and even something like the FCC be re-incorporated into federalized society? Aren't they already, in a sense, under current circumstances?

 

[srlip]

SS is a ponzi scheme. It always was and it will be collapsing within the next 10 years, maybe within 5 years, as the Baby Boomers all hit it, along with the horrific costs of Medicare.

 

[regent]

SS is a ponzi scheme. It always was and it will be collapsing within the next 10 years, maybe within 5 years, as the Baby Boomers all hit it, along with the horrific costs of Medicare.

Do you think any government, Republican or Democratic could allow SS or Medicare to fail? Wonder what happened to Bush's move to privatize Social Security? If we can finance an invasion into Iraq, we can finance SS and Medicare. Nope, those programs are here to stay.

 

[TGN]

So who won the debate, people?